Overall I prefer the Sigma over the 50L because it is much more predictable. Doesn't mean always better, but always more predictable. The 50L gives me something beautiful sometimes, and other times I want to kick it.
I gave Sigma a chance in light of my better judgement. Bought the Sigma 50 early when it first came out for my 5D2. Focus was completely unpredictable. I didn't want to go through the well known "multiple copy to get a good one" Sigma QC issues, so I just returned it. I then just bought the 50L. Here's what I see in comparision of the two models(copies I had):
Sigma 50 f/1.4: great build, sharp wide open, absolutely incredible creamy smooth bokeh, slight yellow tint to colors though. (Again, my copy's focus was completely unpredictable)
Canon 50L f/1.2: not tack sharp wide open, but at f/1.4.....it's just as sharp, if not sharper than the Sigma. Better saturated, more accurate colors, better contrast. Insane build. Not as good bokeh as the Sigma.
Don't get me wrong, the Sigma, provided you get a good copy, is a steal of a lens. The Canon, however, just does some things better. Whether or not you consider the price tag of the 50L worth it is up to you. Focus issues not withstanding, the Sigma was excellent, but as soon as I put on the 50L, I immediately realized what was missing. The Canon color and contrast. To me it was very evident. With work arounds, the 50L's well known focus issues are managable. With my copy of the Sigma, there was nothing I could do to make the focus inconsistancies "predictable", like the 50L.
Never used the L but I just sent my Sigma in for service today. I hope like hell they can fix the focus issues because other than that I really like it. Maggot you described the issue well although mine seemed somewhat predictable to me...but there was nothing I could do to manage it, other than not shoot in lower contrast situations. Mine hated this. Tapping the shutter like crazy before shooting sometimes forced it to finally lock on and focus where the focus point was but still sometimes the image was OOF. Funny thing is I never had this problem with my 50 1.8. How this is possible for a lens that costs $500 is beyond me. Pretty sad actually. When it hits though....very nice indeed.
I had the 50L, and my exp was close to Stan's. When it was right; it was beautiful. I just get more consistent results w/ the Sigma and it is also capable of wonderful iq.
I sold the 50L and bought a second 85L.
If the 50L did not suffer from focus shift issues, I may have kept it.
I've shot two different 50L's, and I own the Sigma. I prefer the Sigma! I can't wait to upgrade from my 5D to a 5DII for focus adjust. It's a stunning lens, but it's not confidence inspiring (despite fantastic results).
There are quite a few threads on this, do a search.
I have one and I find it absolutely amazing. The build, color saturation, contrast control and resolution are better than the Canon and Sigma versions. Much more natural pleasing images. I have tried all three lenses and kept the Zeiss.
From f1.4 to f2.0, the Sigma and Canon are sharper, but from f2.2 to f8 the Zeiss out-resolves even my 85LII and 135L.
The only drawback is manual focus, but it does have focus confirmation which makes things quite easy for old eyes...lol
Another very satisfied 50L owner here. I will say though that it is the most difficult lens I have used. I can say that after extensive use I believe I have "tamed the beast", but using it is no walk in the park. That said, the results are worth the effort.
deepbluejh wrote:
Another very satisfied 50L owner here. I will say though that it is the most difficult lens I have used. I can say that after extensive use I believe I have "tamed the beast", but using it is no walk in the park. That said, the results are worth the effort.
+1, i agree - there is a learning curve how to shoot this lens - the bokeh is unbelievable when you got it. I think 5D2 helps me out in MA or maybe i got a good copy. Beautiful collection Deepbluejh
I'm gonna follow this thread. I have the Sigma 50mm too and I've been seriously thinking about selling it and buying the 50L instead. Not because of the image quality of the Sigma, I simply love the IQ.... but the focusing issues are driving me nuts.
The AF of my first Sigma copy was no good (severe FF) so I exchanged it in the first week.... Unfortunately my second copy is no better (perhaps even worse) then the first one. After using it in real life for some time I decided to send it to Sigma Benelux (the Netherlands). It took 6 and a half weeks before I got it back. They replaced the electronics (the Sigma rep. told me that Sigma changed the cpu of these lenses so that should take care of the focussing problems) and calibrated the AF again. As soon as I got it back I started testing it. But nothing has changed really. It it still front focusing. In controlled testing (close up) it is front focusing about 10 to 13mm. However In real life shooting (a bit less close up in most occasions) it is front focusing alot more inconsistent. And because of this inconsistency it is almost impossible to 'work around' the issue... except for manual focus ofcourse. but I am not buying a AF lens to only use it with MF...
Anyway after using it again for a couple of weeks I decided I don't want to keep working with it like this. But I am hesitant to send it back once more. The thing is, Sigma has a tolerance level of 15mm. This means that a FF of 7.5mm or a BF of 7.5mm is within tolerance (the Sigma technician told me this) But tbh I can't be satisfied with a 15mm tolerance.... And besides that, I'm afraid that callibrating it again will not take away the AF inconsistency....
So I am basically sitting on the fence right now, considering my options....
One thing about sigma lens that sometime you need to reflash the firmware to make it work on new cam body. Bad AF is among the reason that i can't do. Some does report no problem with this lens.
Considering how "normal" a 50mm lens is, it's interesting to see how challenging it is for anyone to design an all-around awesome EF 50mm prime. Each one, no matter what manufacturer, is missing something.
Ariel Bravy wrote:
Considering how "normal" a 50mm lens is, it's interesting to see how challenging it is for anyone to design an all-around awesome EF 50mm prime. Each one, no matter what manufacturer, is missing something.
Yes, I've been wondering about this too.... And because I more or less lost hope that they can fix Sigma lens I'm searching for an alternative. I would love an 50mm f/1.4 with the build and IQ of the Sigma and the AF accuracy (and speed) of my 135L. If they could build one of those I would not even mind spending twice the amount of money the Sigma costs...
